London Banter

London Banter (https://www.londonbanter.co.uk/forum.php)
-   London Transport (https://www.londonbanter.co.uk/london-transport/)
-   -   When the software meets the hardware (https://www.londonbanter.co.uk/london-transport/17456-when-software-meets-hardware.html)

Recliner[_3_] January 21st 19 10:02 AM

When the software meets the hardware
 

From Roger Ford's 'Informed Sources' e-preview:

Quote:

Engineers commissioning the new generation of software-enabled trains are
facing the problem that pretty well every system, and even sub-system, on
their train is computer controlled with its own software. This also has to
interface with the train’s third party software based systems.

For example, during a recent run in a Great Western Railway Class 800 the
Universal Access Toilet was all lit up, but the door had lost power and
wouldn’t lock. When I reported this failure to a member of the on-board
staff, she replied that it was a common issue and the toilet needed
re-booting.

Lest you think that this is just a case of hide-bound traction and rolling
stock engineers unable to cope with new fangled technology, in the column I
quote the Lockheed Martin F-35 fighter comparison.

Its software has been released in ‘blocks’. The latest block, which will
meet the full military specification, took over 30 iterations of the
software to implement. According to Arriva Rail London, the software for
the Bombardier Class 710 Aventra, which has yet to enter service, has
reached Version 27.


http://live.ezezine.com/ezine/archiv...02.archive.txt


Clive Page[_3_] January 21st 19 10:53 AM

When the software meets the hardware
 
On 21/01/2019 10:02, Recliner wrote:
Engineers commissioning the new generation of software-enabled trains are
facing the problem that pretty well every system, and even sub-system, on
their train is computer controlled with its own software. This also has to
interface with the train’s third party software based systems.


I travel quite often on the new-fangled Siemens class 700 trains on Thameslink, which are fitted with passenger information screens at intervals in each carriage. Almost every day I travel I'm on a train where some or all of these screens fail, most often going completely blank part-way through the journey. Sometimes the screens spring back to life at City Thameslink or Farringdon when the power source is changed and I guess some parts of the system are rebooted, but not always. I wonder if the train companies are even aware of these problems - there's no obvious way of reporting them.

I was surprised that in most cases when the screens ail the audio announcements of stations continues as normal. I had assumed that the simplest way of providing audio and visual information was to generate them from the same system, but obviously they have at least partially duplicated things.

Modern buses are similarly afflicted: the Arriva 321 bus service (Luton - Watford) until recently had on-board screens giving information on the next stop, as well as audible announcements. That was at times very useful, especially for those travelling at night on unfamiliar routes. These were obviously not generated by a single system as on many bus journeys I found that the audio and video displays were exactly one bus stop out - which was very confusing. I see that ArrivaBus have now solved the problem by switching both systems off, so while the screens are still there, there is no no passenger information at all (unless you speak to the driver).




For example, during a recent run in a Great Western Railway Class 800 the
Universal Access Toilet was all lit up, but the door had lost power and
wouldn’t lock. When I reported this failure to a member of the on-board
staff, she replied that it was a common issue and the toilet needed
re-booting.

Lest you think that this is just a case of hide-bound traction and rolling
stock engineers unable to cope with new fangled technology, in the column I
quote the Lockheed Martin F-35 fighter comparison.

Its software has been released in ‘blocks’. The latest block, which will
meet the full military specification, took over 30 iterations of the
software to implement. According to Arriva Rail London, the software for
the Bombardier Class 710 Aventra, which has yet to enter service, has
reached Version 27.


http://live.ezezine.com/ezine/archiv...02.archive.txt


--
Clive Page

Recliner[_3_] January 21st 19 11:09 AM

When the software meets the hardware
 
Clive Page wrote:
On 21/01/2019 10:02, Recliner wrote:
Engineers commissioning the new generation of software-enabled trains are
facing the problem that pretty well every system, and even sub-system, on
their train is computer controlled with its own software. This also has to
interface with the train’s third party software based systems.


I travel quite often on the new-fangled Siemens class 700 trains on
Thameslink, which are fitted with passenger information screens at
intervals in each carriage. Almost every day I travel I'm on a train
where some or all of these screens fail, most often going completely
blank part-way through the journey. Sometimes the screens spring back to
life at City Thameslink or Farringdon when the power source is changed
and I guess some parts of the system are rebooted, but not always. I
wonder if the train companies are even aware of these problems - there's
no obvious way of reporting them.

I was surprised that in most cases when the screens ail the audio
announcements of stations continues as normal. I had assumed that the
simplest way of providing audio and visual information was to generate
them from the same system, but obviously they have at least partially duplicated things.


Yes, that is surprising. Presumably the same data feeder system is used,
but the computerised visual and audio subsystems are different, maybe even
from different sub-contractors.


Modern buses are similarly afflicted: the Arriva 321 bus service (Luton
- Watford) until recently had on-board screens giving information on
the next stop, as well as audible announcements. That was at times very
useful, especially for those travelling at night on unfamiliar routes.
These were obviously not generated by a single system as on many bus
journeys I found that the audio and video displays were exactly one bus
stop out - which was very confusing. I see that ArrivaBus have now
solved the problem by switching both systems off, so while the screens
are still there, there is no no passenger information at all (unless you
speak to the driver).




For example, during a recent run in a Great Western Railway Class 800 the
Universal Access Toilet was all lit up, but the door had lost power and
wouldn’t lock. When I reported this failure to a member of the on-board
staff, she replied that it was a common issue and the toilet needed
re-booting.

Lest you think that this is just a case of hide-bound traction and rolling
stock engineers unable to cope with new fangled technology, in the column I
quote the Lockheed Martin F-35 fighter comparison.

Its software has been released in ‘blocks’. The latest block, which will
meet the full military specification, took over 30 iterations of the
software to implement. According to Arriva Rail London, the software for
the Bombardier Class 710 Aventra, which has yet to enter service, has
reached Version 27.


http://live.ezezine.com/ezine/archiv...02.archive.txt






Nick Leverton January 21st 19 11:27 AM

When the software meets the hardware
 
In article ,
Recliner wrote:
Clive Page wrote:
On 21/01/2019 10:02, Recliner wrote:
Engineers commissioning the new generation of software-enabled trains are
facing the problem that pretty well every system, and even sub-system, on
their train is computer controlled with its own software. This also has to
interface with the train’s third party software based systems.


I travel quite often on the new-fangled Siemens class 700 trains on
Thameslink, which are fitted with passenger information screens at
intervals in each carriage. Almost every day I travel I'm on a train
where some or all of these screens fail, most often going completely
blank part-way through the journey. Sometimes the screens spring back to
life at City Thameslink or Farringdon when the power source is changed
and I guess some parts of the system are rebooted, but not always. I
wonder if the train companies are even aware of these problems - there's
no obvious way of reporting them.

I was surprised that in most cases when the screens ail the audio
announcements of stations continues as normal. I had assumed that the
simplest way of providing audio and visual information was to generate
them from the same system, but obviously they have at least partially duplicated things.


Yes, that is surprising. Presumably the same data feeder system is used,
but the computerised visual and audio subsystems are different, maybe even
from different sub-contractors.


If it's like the train PIS systems I have worked on then they are
almost certainly part of the same system, but the audio playout will
be sent from the PIS controller audio output direct into the train PA,
whereas the displays will be distributed through a separate output via
one or more intermediate controllers which feed the screens. It will
be something in the latter chain that is failing.

Nick
--
"The Internet, a sort of ersatz counterfeit of real life"
-- Janet Street-Porter, BBC2, 19th March 1996

Theo[_2_] January 21st 19 11:38 AM

When the software meets the hardware
 
In uk.transport.london Recliner wrote:
Yes, that is surprising. Presumably the same data feeder system is used,
but the computerised visual and audio subsystems are different, maybe even
from different sub-contractors.


I assume it's like a modern car, which is a distributed system containing
dozens of ECUs (ie computers) flying in loose formation, joined by a
network. In the case of an 8 or 12 coach train there are probably hundreds
of nodes.

Building distributed systems is hard, especially when heterogenous, and when
involving physical inputs which are difficult to simulate in a test
environment (eg the kinematics of the train, doors, toilets, etc).

Theo

[email protected] January 21st 19 12:14 PM

When the software meets the hardware
 
On Mon, 21 Jan 2019 10:53:47 +0000
Clive Page wrote:
On 21/01/2019 10:02, Recliner wrote:
Engineers commissioning the new generation of software-enabled trains are
facing the problem that pretty well every system, and even sub-system, on
their train is computer controlled with its own software. This also has to
interface with the train’s third party software based systems.


I travel quite often on the new-fangled Siemens class 700 trains on
Thameslink, which are fitted with passenger information screens at intervals
in each carriage. Almost every day I travel I'm on a train where some or all
of these screens fail, most often going completely blank part-way through the
journey. Sometimes the screens spring back to life at City Thameslink or
Farringdon when the power source is changed and I guess some parts of the
system are rebooted, but not always. I wonder if the train companies are even
aware of these problems - there's no obvious way of reporting them.


At least thats not a show stopper, the trains can still be used. It seems
Siemens seem to have their ducks in line unlike Bombadier when it comes to
the important subsystems.



blt_28j6@l2q_geq6xy.edu January 21st 19 12:23 PM

When the software meets the hardware
 
On 21 Jan 2019 11:38:48 +0000 (GMT)
Theo wrote:
In uk.transport.london Recliner wrote:
Yes, that is surprising. Presumably the same data feeder system is used,
but the computerised visual and audio subsystems are different, maybe even
from different sub-contractors.


I assume it's like a modern car, which is a distributed system containing
dozens of ECUs (ie computers) flying in loose formation, joined by a
network. In the case of an 8 or 12 coach train there are probably hundreds
of nodes.

Building distributed systems is hard, especially when heterogenous, and when


Not really. So long as there is a published API/interface to each subsystem
then the seperate nodes should just be black boxes with internals that the
system intergration team shouldn't have to worry about. The problems arise
when the published interfaces and/or behaviours don't match the actual ones.

involving physical inputs which are difficult to simulate in a test
environment (eg the kinematics of the train, doors, toilets, etc).


Toilets don't need to be software controlled in the first place. Only teams
trying to justify their jobs would make them so.


Jonathan Amery January 21st 19 12:30 PM

When the software meets the hardware
 
In article ,
Clive Page wrote:

I travel quite often on the new-fangled Siemens class 700 trains on Thameslink, which are fitted with passenger information screens at intervals in each carriage. Almost every day I travel I'm on a train where some or all of these screens fail, most often going completely blank part-way through the journey. Sometimes the screens spring back to life at City Thameslink or Farringdon when the power source is changed and I guess some parts of the system are rebooted, but not always. I wonder if the train companies are even aware of these problems - there's no obvious way of reporting them.

I suspect TL twitter have got bored of me sending them tweets showing
displays doing odd things...

--
Jonathan Amery. God says "Who will go for me? Who will extend my reach?
##### And who, when few will listen, will prophecy and preach?
#######__o And who, when few bid welcome, will offer all they know?
#######'/ And who, when few dare follow, will walk the road I show?

Basil Jet[_4_] January 22nd 19 07:06 AM

When the software meets the hardware
 
On 21/01/2019 12:23, wrote:

Toilets don't need to be software controlled in the first place. Only teams
trying to justify their jobs would make them so.


But who would want the job of examining the logs?

--
Basil Jet - Current favourite song...
What by Bruce
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RtJEAud9vao

blt_ewmWke6gp@7wmozttvpodiw_9i.gov.uk January 22nd 19 11:13 AM

When the software meets the hardware
 
On Tue, 22 Jan 2019 07:06:09 +0000
Basil Jet wrote:
On 21/01/2019 12:23, wrote:

Toilets don't need to be software controlled in the first place. Only teams
trying to justify their jobs would make them so.


But who would want the job of examining the logs?


So many obvious toilet joke responses, so hard to resist :)


Peter Able[_2_] January 22nd 19 04:34 PM

When the software meets the hardware
 
On 21/01/2019 10:02, Recliner wrote:

From Roger Ford's 'Informed Sources' e-preview:


Lest you think that this is just a case of hide-bound traction and rolling
stock engineers unable to cope with new fangled technology



http://live.ezezine.com/ezine/archiv...02.archive.txt


Actually, that is how I suspect it is.

It was disappointing, at least to this retired engineer, how
unexpectedly severe EMC on the ECML was a recent issue. Now
unexpectedly severe software interface issues arise.

You can put it down to "loss of memory" as everyone seems to be keen to
do - or you can face the real issue which, IMHO, is the narrowness of
learning of modern engineers.

PA

Peter Able[_2_] January 22nd 19 05:31 PM

When the software meets the hardware
 
On 21/01/2019 10:02, Recliner wrote:

From Roger Ford's 'Informed Sources' e-preview:


Lest you think that this is just a case of hide-bound traction and rolling
stock engineers unable to cope with new fangled technology



http://live.ezezine.com/ezine/archiv...02.archive.txt


Actually, that is how I suspect it is.

It was disappointing, at least to this retired engineer, how
unexpectedly severe EMC on the ECML was a recent issue. Now
unexpectedly severe software interface issues arise.

You can put it down to "loss of memory" as everyone seems to be keen to
do - or you can face the real issue which, IMHO, is the narrowness of
learning of modern engineers.

PA

Marland January 23rd 19 01:09 AM

When the software meets the hardware
 
Basil Jet wrote:
On 21/01/2019 12:23, wrote:

Toilets don't need to be software controlled in the first place. Only teams
trying to justify their jobs would make them so.


But who would want the job of examining the logs?


I expect there is someone closeted away somewhere.

GH


Christopher A. Lee[_2_] January 23rd 19 01:12 AM

When the software meets the hardware
 
On 23 Jan 2019 01:09:17 GMT, Marland
wrote:

Basil Jet wrote:
On 21/01/2019 12:23, wrote:

Toilets don't need to be software controlled in the first place. Only teams
trying to justify their jobs would make them so.


But who would want the job of examining the logs?


I expect there is someone closeted away somewhere.


If they're not bogged down.

Chris J Dixon January 23rd 19 08:11 AM

When the software meets the hardware
 
Christopher A. Lee wrote:

On 23 Jan 2019 01:09:17 GMT, Marland
wrote:

Basil Jet wrote:
On 21/01/2019 12:23, wrote:

Toilets don't need to be software controlled in the first place. Only teams
trying to justify their jobs would make them so.

But who would want the job of examining the logs?


I expect there is someone closeted away somewhere.


If they're not bogged down.


Just going through the motions.

Chris
--
Chris J Dixon Nottingham UK


Plant amazing Acers.

Anna Noyd-Dryver January 23rd 19 09:11 AM

When the software meets the hardware
 
Recliner wrote:

From Roger Ford's 'Informed Sources' e-preview:

Quote:

Engineers commissioning the new generation of software-enabled trains are
facing the problem that pretty well every system, and even sub-system, on
their train is computer controlled with its own software. This also has to
interface with the train’s third party software based systems.

For example, during a recent run in a Great Western Railway Class 800 the
Universal Access Toilet was all lit up, but the door had lost power and
wouldn’t lock. When I reported this failure to a member of the on-board
staff, she replied that it was a common issue and the toilet needed
re-booting.


IMX the two usual problems with the UAT are door and water.

The door has two main problems, both arising when it’s not left to 'do its
own thing'. The main one is that after unlocking the door, it seems to take
about 1/2 second for the door open button to become responsive. Press it
too quick and the door doesn’t open despite the button being illuminated.
People then push the door manually to open it and the toilet declares
itself out of use because it thinks the door is broken. Solution - push it
closed and it’s happy again. The second door problem is similar - sometimes
a cant, or an over-enthusiastic door mech, makes the door bounce back
slightly off the frame - only a centimetre or so, but enough that the
toilet declares itself OOU. The solution is the same as before.

Water pressure (distinct from water level or waste tank level) seems to be
a recurring problem across the fleet - I’ve taken a 9-car from Stoke
Gifford to Swindon empty and by the time I got to Swindon 5 toilets had
declared themselves failed! This is the failure which results in either
empty pan (rather than the usual couple of inches of water in the bottom)
or, if used, full pan (not flushing). The UATs lock themselves out of use
in this situation, something the regular toilets can’t do. This fault can
sometimes, but rarely IMX, be solved by pressing the ‘reset’ button behind
the mirror.

The other annoying thing will the UAT module is that the tap sensor is
offset some way to the left of both the water outlet and the symbol above
it.


Anna Noyd-Dryver

Ian Clifton January 23rd 19 10:39 AM

When the software meets the hardware
 
Chris J Dixon writes:

Christopher A. Lee wrote:

On 23 Jan 2019 01:09:17 GMT, Marland
wrote:

Basil Jet wrote:
On 21/01/2019 12:23, wrote:

Toilets don't need to be software controlled in the first place. Only teams
trying to justify their jobs would make them so.

But who would want the job of examining the logs?

I expect there is someone closeted away somewhere.


If they're not bogged down.


Just going through the motions.


A bad workman blames his stools.
--
Ian â—Ž

Anna Noyd-Dryver January 23rd 19 07:31 PM

When the software meets the hardware
 
wrote:


Toilets don't need to be software controlled in the first place. Only teams
trying to justify their jobs would make them so.



It could be controlled by a box of relays, I suppose, but it wouldn’t
necessarily be more reliable and there’d still have to be a computer
interface for fault reporting.


Anna Noyd-Dryver

Basil Jet[_4_] January 23rd 19 07:34 PM

When the software meets the hardware
 
On 23/01/2019 19:31, Anna Noyd-Dryver wrote:
wrote:


Toilets don't need to be software controlled in the first place. Only teams
trying to justify their jobs would make them so.



It could be controlled by a box of relays, I suppose, but it wouldn’t
necessarily be more reliable and there’d still have to be a computer
interface for fault reporting.


Isn't the point of it that the PIS systems all the way down the train
report which toilets are vacant?

--
Basil Jet - Current favourite song...
What by Bruce
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RtJEAud9vao

Graeme Wall January 23rd 19 07:36 PM

When the software meets the hardware
 
On 23/01/2019 19:34, Basil Jet wrote:
On 23/01/2019 19:31, Anna Noyd-Dryver wrote:
wrote:


Toilets don't need to be software controlled in the first place. Only
teams
trying to justify their jobs would make them so.



It could be controlled by a box of relays, I suppose, but it wouldn’t
necessarily be more reliable and there’d still have to be a computer
interface for fault reporting.


Isn't the point of it that the PIS systems all the way down the train
report which toilets are vacant?


In that context it is rather an unfortunate acronym.

--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.


Anna Noyd-Dryver January 24th 19 07:43 AM

When the software meets the hardware
 
Basil Jet wrote:
On 23/01/2019 19:31, Anna Noyd-Dryver wrote:
wrote:


Toilets don't need to be software controlled in the first place. Only teams
trying to justify their jobs would make them so.



It could be controlled by a box of relays, I suppose, but it wouldn’t
necessarily be more reliable and there’d still have to be a computer
interface for fault reporting.


Isn't the point of it that the PIS systems all the way down the train
report which toilets are vacant?


IETs don’t have that feature. In any case, that could still work if the
toilet (not the PIS) was controlled by a box of relays.


Anna Noyd-Dryver


[email protected] January 24th 19 08:41 AM

When the software meets the hardware
 
CONTACT EMAIL ..... danyroland27(@)AT gmail(Dot)com

CALL OR TEXT (949) 228-9436

WHATSAPP+1(949)228-9436

Wickr me ID:.......duroharry

hello buds man is back with good deals for long term buyers and good
and reliable if what you are interested is not on my list let me know
what you need..i also offer sample to built trust

see prices

FOR DIAZEPAM AND KETAMINE SMALLER ORDER

diazepam 10mg 300pills £25
diazepam 10mg 500pills £40
diazepam 5mg 1000pills £60
ketamine £20 each vial/1g

FOR DIAZEPAM AND KETAMINE BULK ORDER

diazepam 10mg 1000pills £65
diazepam 10mg 5000pills £280
diazepam 5mg 1000pills £60
diazepam 5mg 5000pills £270
diazepam 5mg 10000pills £270
diazepam 10mg 10000pills £500
ketamine £15 each vial/1g

FOR KETAMINE SMALLER ORDER

5vials............£100
10vials............£175
20vials............£325
25vials............£400

FOR KETAMINE BULK ORDER

25vials............£400
50vials............£650
100vials............£1200
200vials............£2100

FOR WEED SMALLER ORDER

10g,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, £50
14g,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,£75
28g/oz,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, £100

FOR WEED BULK ORDER

56g/2oz,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, £175
112g/4oz,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,£300
500g/17oz,,,,,,,,,,,, £600
1000g/1kg,,,,,,,,,,,,,£900

i also have my delivery records all around the worlds and i provide
dated pictures with buyers name and my name

CONTACT EMAIL ..... danyroland27(@)AT gmail(Dot)com

CALL OR TEXT (949) 228-9436

WHATSAPP+1(949)228-9436

Wickr me ID:.......duroharry

thanks
buds man

Optimist[_2_] January 24th 19 01:11 PM

When the software meets the hardware
 
Go away, pest.

Complaint sent.

On Thu, 24 Jan 2019 00:41:21 -0800 (PST), wrote:

CONTACT EMAIL ..... danyroland27(@)AT gmail(Dot)com

CALL OR TEXT (949) 228-9436

WHATSAPP+1(949)228-9436

Wickr me ID:.......duroharry

hello buds man is back with good deals for long term buyers and good
and reliable if what you are interested is not on my list let me know
what you need..i also offer sample to built trust

see prices

FOR DIAZEPAM AND KETAMINE SMALLER ORDER

diazepam 10mg 300pills £25
diazepam 10mg 500pills £40
diazepam 5mg 1000pills £60
ketamine £20 each vial/1g

FOR DIAZEPAM AND KETAMINE BULK ORDER

diazepam 10mg 1000pills £65
diazepam 10mg 5000pills £280
diazepam 5mg 1000pills £60
diazepam 5mg 5000pills £270
diazepam 5mg 10000pills £270
diazepam 10mg 10000pills £500
ketamine £15 each vial/1g

FOR KETAMINE SMALLER ORDER

5vials............£100
10vials............£175
20vials............£325
25vials............£400

FOR KETAMINE BULK ORDER

25vials............£400
50vials............£650
100vials............£1200
200vials............£2100

FOR WEED SMALLER ORDER

10g,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, £50
14g,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,£75
28g/oz,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, £100

FOR WEED BULK ORDER

56g/2oz,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, £175
112g/4oz,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,£300
500g/17oz,,,,,,,,,,,, £600
1000g/1kg,,,,,,,,,,,,,£900

i also have my delivery records all around the worlds and i provide
dated pictures with buyers name and my name

CONTACT EMAIL ..... danyroland27(@)AT gmail(Dot)com

CALL OR TEXT (949) 228-9436

WHATSAPP+1(949)228-9436

Wickr me ID:.......duroharry

thanks
buds man


Bryan Morris January 24th 19 03:40 PM

When the software meets the hardware
 
In message , Optimist
writes
Go away, pest.

Complaint sent.


I assume, if, like me when these posts first arrived, you responded to
"Complaints-To: " you'll be told by Google that
you aren't authorised to complain !!!

--
Bryan Morris

[email protected] January 24th 19 04:52 PM

When the software meets the hardware
 
On Wed, 23 Jan 2019 19:31:06 -0000 (UTC)
Anna Noyd-Dryver wrote:
wrote:


Toilets don't need to be software controlled in the first place. Only teams
trying to justify their jobs would make them so.



It could be controlled by a box of relays, I suppose, but it wouldn’t


Why does it need even that? A purely mechanical flush would work fine. Its
not as if the train is doing barrel rolls.

necessarily be more reliable and there’d still have to be a computer
interface for fault reporting.


Why is fault reporting required? People generally won't use a broken toilet and
the sorts who will will just **** up the wall if its closed anyway plus the
cleaners can simply check them in the evening and report if they're not working.

Not everything needs to be computerised or have some sort of monitoring system
built in.



Someone Somewhere January 24th 19 05:22 PM

When the software meets the hardware
 
On 24/01/2019 16:52, wrote:
On Wed, 23 Jan 2019 19:31:06 -0000 (UTC)
Anna Noyd-Dryver wrote:
wrote:


Toilets don't need to be software controlled in the first place. Only teams
trying to justify their jobs would make them so.



It could be controlled by a box of relays, I suppose, but it wouldn’t


Why does it need even that? A purely mechanical flush would work fine. Its
not as if the train is doing barrel rolls.

I suspect it's not just the bog itself (which is easy as you say), but:

1. The lights and any interlocking between them and the door / lock
2. The occupied light outside
3. The occupied light somewhere else in the carriage
4. Any sensors in the toilet - smoke, fire, excessive moisture etc
5. Emergency alarm pull
6. Overstay alert
And so on and so on. Yes - you could build it all out of wires and
relays, but it sort of makes sense to have it all controlled and linked
together by a computer that could then log and report issues centrally



Chris J Dixon January 24th 19 06:13 PM

When the software meets the hardware
 
wrote:


Why does it need even that? A purely mechanical flush would work fine. Its
not as if the train is doing barrel rolls.


I wish you luck in trying to find a route to the retention tank
for a domestic size waste pipe, and in dealing with the volume of
water required.

Vacuum toilets are not cheap, or simple, but they make retention
toilets possible.

I was involved in planning work on a trial system to be fitted in
place of an inboard retention tank (which was abandoned once the
real cost/benefit figures began to emerge). This was very similar
to the kit used on submarines, and was essentially a
bio-digester, which produced clean water of a quality suitable
for flushing, thereby much extending the service intervals.

Chris
--
Chris J Dixon Nottingham UK


Plant amazing Acers.

Anna Noyd-Dryver January 24th 19 08:22 PM

When the software meets the hardware
 
wrote:
On Wed, 23 Jan 2019 19:31:06 -0000 (UTC)
Anna Noyd-Dryver wrote:
wrote:


Toilets don't need to be software controlled in the first place. Only teams
trying to justify their jobs would make them so.



It could be controlled by a box of relays, I suppose, but it wouldn’t


Why does it need even that? A purely mechanical flush would work fine. Its
not as if the train is doing barrel rolls.


The vacuum flush saves water and retention tank capacity and allows the
train to run a whole day (or maybe two, for those which outstable) without
tanking; HSTs are tanked at every terminus and still run dry. 323s last a
day, usually, except when there was a leaky valve. 323 tanks overflow onto
the track when full, though, which is no longer allowed - so the toilet
needs to be able to lock itself out of use when the tank is full.

If it’s the Universal Access Toilet, it can lock the door out of use when
the toilet is out of use, too.

necessarily be more reliable and there’d still have to be a computer
interface for fault reporting.


Why is fault reporting required?


So that Hitachi can be notified that there’s a problem and send a fitter
out; or at the very least see a pattern of recurring faults and investigate
the underlying fault, rather than just press the reset button every night.
(Whether these things actually happen is another matter!)

People generally won't use a broken toilet


On 800s the smaller toilets with the manual doors which therefore can’t
lock themselves out of use, generally get filled to the brim with ****
before people stop using them.

HSTs and 323s, however, I’ve seen clogged and blocked to the brim with
excrement and paper, which (a) stinks (b) is difficult to clean (for HSTs
it requires an extra shunt to the siding with the flushing apron and
application of hosepipe to either end of the pipe until it’s cleared; that
could be the difference between several sets leaving depot on time in the
morning or not).

and
the sorts who will will just **** up the wall if its closed anyway


Good job the toilet can lock itself OOU then.

plus the
cleaners can simply check them in the evening and report if they're not working.


Yes, and the same fault reoccurs the next morning.

Not everything needs to be computerised or have some sort of monitoring system
built in.


No, but if it can predict faults before they occur (eg, that door/set of
points is taking longer and longer to move, send someone to check it out)
then that’s an advantage, surely?


Anna Noyd-Dryver



David Cantrell January 25th 19 10:21 AM

When the software meets the hardware
 
On Thu, Jan 24, 2019 at 05:22:22PM +0000, Someone Somewhere wrote:

[on why train bogs should be techno-bogs]

I suspect it's not just the bog itself (which is easy as you say), but:

1. The lights and any interlocking between them and the door / lock


Solved by having modern low-energy LEDs, always on

2. The occupied light outside


A mechanical switch in the mechanical lock.

3. The occupied light somewhere else in the carriage


Wired in parallel with the prior light and both controlled by the same
switch.

4. Any sensors in the toilet - smoke, fire, excessive moisture etc


I really really hope that the fire alarm is *not* controlled by a
computer.

5. Emergency alarm pull


I really really hope that that isn't controlled by a computer either.
Or if it is then there shouldn't be anything in the bog itself except
a switch or two.

6. Overstay alert


What are the benefits of this? I can certainly see that there are some,
but do they outweigh the costs of false alarms and of taking the bog out
of service when the techno- part of the techno-bog metaphorically ****s
its silicon pants?

--
David Cantrell | Pope | First Church of the Symmetrical Internet

Godliness is next to Englishness

Arthur Figgis January 25th 19 06:31 PM

When the software meets the hardware
 
On 24/01/2019 18:13, Chris J Dixon wrote:

I was involved in planning work on a trial system to be fitted in
place of an inboard retention tank (which was abandoned once the
real cost/benefit figures began to emerge). This was very similar
to the kit used on submarines, and was essentially a
bio-digester, which produced clean water of a quality suitable
for flushing, thereby much extending the service intervals.


I think India and Russia use something like that on some /very/ long
distance trains.


--
Arthur Figgis Surrey, UK

blt_3n@9xuuxcpxmy5ssuxi97gzn_.org January 25th 19 09:34 PM

When the software meets the hardware
 
On Thu, 24 Jan 2019 20:22:39 -0000 (UTC)
Anna Noyd-Dryver wrote:
wrote:
On Wed, 23 Jan 2019 19:31:06 -0000 (UTC)
Anna Noyd-Dryver wrote:
wrote:


Toilets don't need to be software controlled in the first place. Only teams


trying to justify their jobs would make them so.



It could be controlled by a box of relays, I suppose, but it wouldn’t


Why does it need even that? A purely mechanical flush would work fine. Its
not as if the train is doing barrel rolls.


The vacuum flush saves water and retention tank capacity and allows the
train to run a whole day (or maybe two, for those which outstable) without
tanking;


How delightful. A mobile sewage farm.

Why is fault reporting required?


So that Hitachi can be notified that there’s a problem and send a fitter
out; or at the very least see a pattern of recurring faults and investigate
the underlying fault, rather than just press the reset button every night.
(Whether these things actually happen is another matter!)


So the toilets are complex so that when a fault occurs due to their complexity
a technician can be notified? Calling Mr Heller....

On 800s the smaller toilets with the manual doors which therefore can’t
lock themselves out of use, generally get filled to the brim with ****
before people stop using them.

HSTs and 323s, however, I’ve seen clogged and blocked to the brim with
excrement and paper, which (a) stinks (b) is difficult to clean (for HSTs
it requires an extra shunt to the siding with the flushing apron and
application of hosepipe to either end of the pipe until it’s cleared; that
could be the difference between several sets leaving depot on time in the
morning or not).


Perhaps install more toilets in stations and get rid of them on trains
altogether. We're a small island, there are no journeys really long enough to
make them worthwhile except maybe the overnight sleeper to scotland but thats
not a commuter train.

Not everything needs to be computerised or have some sort of monitoring

system
built in.


No, but if it can predict faults before they occur (eg, that door/set of
points is taking longer and longer to move, send someone to check it out)
then that’s an advantage, surely?


Only if that outweighs the disadvantages of the toilet not working half the
time because of its complexity.


Chris J Dixon January 26th 19 09:40 AM

When the software meets the hardware
 
wrote:

Perhaps install more toilets in stations and get rid of them on trains
altogether. We're a small island, there are no journeys really long enough to
make them worthwhile except maybe the overnight sleeper to scotland but thats
not a commuter train.


Perhaps your view will change as you age. ;-)

Chris
--
Chris J Dixon Nottingham UK


Plant amazing Acers.

Anna Noyd-Dryver January 26th 19 09:52 AM

When the software meets the hardware
 
wrote:
On Thu, 24 Jan 2019 20:22:39 -0000 (UTC)
Anna Noyd-Dryver wrote:
wrote:
On Wed, 23 Jan 2019 19:31:06 -0000 (UTC)
Anna Noyd-Dryver wrote:
wrote:


Toilets don't need to be software controlled in the first place. Only teams


trying to justify their jobs would make them so.



It could be controlled by a box of relays, I suppose, but it wouldn’t

Why does it need even that? A purely mechanical flush would work fine. Its
not as if the train is doing barrel rolls.


The vacuum flush saves water and retention tank capacity and allows the
train to run a whole day (or maybe two, for those which outstable) without
tanking;


How delightful. A mobile sewage farm.


The alternative is for the entire railway to be the sewage farm.

Why is fault reporting required?


So that Hitachi can be notified that there’s a problem and send a fitter
out; or at the very least see a pattern of recurring faults and investigate
the underlying fault, rather than just press the reset button every night.
(Whether these things actually happen is another matter!)


So the toilets are complex so that when a fault occurs due to their complexity
a technician can be notified? Calling Mr Heller....


Conventional toilets get blocked too. Conventional toilet door locks fail
too. Conventional toilets run out of water too...

On 800s the smaller toilets with the manual doors which therefore can’t
lock themselves out of use, generally get filled to the brim with ****
before people stop using them.

HSTs and 323s, however, I’ve seen clogged and blocked to the brim with
excrement and paper, which (a) stinks (b) is difficult to clean (for HSTs
it requires an extra shunt to the siding with the flushing apron and
application of hosepipe to either end of the pipe until it’s cleared; that
could be the difference between several sets leaving depot on time in the
morning or not).


Perhaps install more toilets in stations and get rid of them on trains
altogether. We're a small island, there are no journeys really long enough to
make them worthwhile except maybe the overnight sleeper to scotland but thats
not a commuter train.


People travelling 5h30 from Paddington to Penzance might disagree.


Anna Noyd-Dryver

[email protected] January 26th 19 07:27 PM

When the software meets the hardware
 
On Sat, 26 Jan 2019 09:52:16 -0000 (UTC)
Anna Noyd-Dryver wrote:
wrote:
On Thu, 24 Jan 2019 20:22:39 -0000 (UTC)
Anna Noyd-Dryver wrote:
The vacuum flush saves water and retention tank capacity and allows the
train to run a whole day (or maybe two, for those which outstable) without
tanking;


How delightful. A mobile sewage farm.


The alternative is for the entire railway to be the sewage farm.


I meant in the sense of them no necessarily being emptied every night.

So the toilets are complex so that when a fault occurs due to their

complexity
a technician can be notified? Calling Mr Heller....


Conventional toilets get blocked too. Conventional toilet door locks fail
too. Conventional toilets run out of water too...


I can't remember the last time the toilets in my office failed never mind
my house. As for the locks failing, who the hell cares? Keep it shut with your
foot.

Perhaps install more toilets in stations and get rid of them on trains
altogether. We're a small island, there are no journeys really long enough to


make them worthwhile except maybe the overnight sleeper to scotland but thats


not a commuter train.


People travelling 5h30 from Paddington to Penzance might disagree.


Possibly, but those sort of journeys are probably 1 in 1000. There's little
reason to have toilets on most multiple units IMO, certainly not something
like Thameslink where the average journey is probably 45 mins.


Anna Noyd-Dryver January 26th 19 10:20 PM

When the software meets the hardware
 
wrote:
On Sat, 26 Jan 2019 09:52:16 -0000 (UTC)
Anna Noyd-Dryver wrote:
wrote:
On Thu, 24 Jan 2019 20:22:39 -0000 (UTC)
Anna Noyd-Dryver wrote:
The vacuum flush saves water and retention tank capacity and allows the
train to run a whole day (or maybe two, for those which outstable) without
tanking;

How delightful. A mobile sewage farm.


The alternative is for the entire railway to be the sewage farm.


I meant in the sense of them no necessarily being emptied every night.


How else would you deal with the sets which outstable at Hereford,
Worcester and Exeter?

So the toilets are complex so that when a fault occurs due to their

complexity
a technician can be notified? Calling Mr Heller....


Conventional toilets get blocked too. Conventional toilet door locks fail
too. Conventional toilets run out of water too...


I can't remember the last time the toilets in my office failed never mind
my house. As for the locks failing, who the hell cares? Keep it shut with your
foot.


How does that work with a sliding door, a wheelchair user, or even a
non-wheelchair user in the accessible toilets where the door is too far
away? Or the occasional station toilet cubicle where the door opens
outwards...

The toilets in your house presumably aren’t used as intensively as train
ones? Over the years I’ve known domestic toilets get blocked, flush broken,
flushes which only work with a certain technique, multiple flushes needed
to actually clear the bowl... Mess room toilets which perhaps approach
train toilet frequency of use, get blocked often enough that people add the
word 'again' when they talk about it...

Perhaps install more toilets in stations and get rid of them on trains
altogether. We're a small island, there are no journeys really long enough to


make them worthwhile except maybe the overnight sleeper to scotland but thats


not a commuter train.


People travelling 5h30 from Paddington to Penzance might disagree.


Possibly, but those sort of journeys are probably 1 in 1000. There's little
reason to have toilets on most multiple units IMO, certainly not something
like Thameslink where the average journey is probably 45 mins.



Round here the commuter trains are often in the middle of long journeys,
between 4 and 10 hours end-to-end. Just because I’m only on board for 15
minutes doesn’t mean everyone else is.


Anna Noyd-Dryver


Marland January 26th 19 11:10 PM

When the software meets the hardware
 
wrote:


Perhaps install more toilets in stations and get rid of them on trains
altogether. We're a small island, there are no journeys really long enough to


make them worthwhile except maybe the overnight sleeper to scotland but thats


not a commuter train.


People travelling 5h30 from Paddington to Penzance might disagree.


Possibly, but those sort of journeys are probably 1 in 1000. There's little
reason to have toilets on most multiple units IMO, certainly not something
like Thameslink where the average journey is probably 45 mins.



Thought you had children?
Many youngsters are not able to go for hours without having to go the
toilet and many seem to want use one soon after all preparations have been
completed ,possibly brought on by excitement.
Would not like to spend the time on a long journey in the vicinity of an 7
year old who has **** himself and a child of that age will not be in
nappies.
Then there is the large percentage of the population who are female whose
different plumbing ,menstrual
cycles and smaller bladder capacity when pregnant often means they need
toilet facilities more often than men.
I would agree you don’t need toilets on commuter trains where such as
crossrail where off train facilities can not be too far away and frequent
services make journey interruptions not the end of the world but there are
many journeys around the 3 to 5 hour length such as Waterloo Exeter that
some would fine awkward, your proposal that people could get off at
stations might work for a single traveller , but they might be giving up a
reserved seat. Could be even worse for a family who would have to get off
at successive stops as each sprog
decides its their time to go.

GH





martin.coffee January 27th 19 02:05 AM

When the software meets the hardware
 
On 26/01/2019 22:20, Anna Noyd-Dryver wrote:
wrote:
On Sat, 26 Jan 2019 09:52:16 -0000 (UTC)
Anna Noyd-Dryver wrote:
wrote:
On Thu, 24 Jan 2019 20:22:39 -0000 (UTC)
Anna Noyd-Dryver wrote:
The vacuum flush saves water and retention tank capacity and allows the
train to run a whole day (or maybe two, for those which outstable) without
tanking;

How delightful. A mobile sewage farm.


The alternative is for the entire railway to be the sewage farm.


I meant in the sense of them no necessarily being emptied every night.


How else would you deal with the sets which outstable at Hereford,
Worcester and Exeter?

So the toilets are complex so that when a fault occurs due to their
complexity
a technician can be notified? Calling Mr Heller....


Conventional toilets get blocked too. Conventional toilet door locks fail
too. Conventional toilets run out of water too...


I can't remember the last time the toilets in my office failed never mind
my house. As for the locks failing, who the hell cares? Keep it shut with your
foot.


How does that work with a sliding door, a wheelchair user, or even a
non-wheelchair user in the accessible toilets where the door is too far
away? Or the occasional station toilet cubicle where the door opens
outwards...

The toilets in your house presumably aren’t used as intensively as train
ones? Over the years I’ve known domestic toilets get blocked, flush broken,
flushes which only work with a certain technique, multiple flushes needed
to actually clear the bowl... Mess room toilets which perhaps approach
train toilet frequency of use, get blocked often enough that people add the
word 'again' when they talk about it...

Perhaps install more toilets in stations and get rid of them on trains
altogether. We're a small island, there are no journeys really long enough to

make them worthwhile except maybe the overnight sleeper to scotland but thats

not a commuter train.


People travelling 5h30 from Paddington to Penzance might disagree.


Possibly, but those sort of journeys are probably 1 in 1000. There's little
reason to have toilets on most multiple units IMO, certainly not something
like Thameslink where the average journey is probably 45 mins.



Round here the commuter trains are often in the middle of long journeys,
between 4 and 10 hours end-to-end. Just because I’m only on board for 15
minutes doesn’t mean everyone else is.

The guard was just locking the only working wash room on a Cardiff
Pompey service last year just as I got there. He suggested I got off at
Cosham so I had him endorse my ticket and caught the following gWr
service with a one hour delay. I claimed my refund for an hour's delay
and got it.

Anna Noyd-Dryver January 27th 19 05:46 AM

When the software meets the hardware
 
martin.coffee wrote:


The guard was just locking the only working wash room on a Cardiff
Pompey service last year just as I got there. He suggested I got off at
Cosham so I had him endorse my ticket and caught the following gWr
service with a one hour delay. I claimed my refund for an hour's delay
and got it.


If the toilet was working, why was it being locked out of use?


Anna Noyd-Dryver


martin.coffee January 27th 19 10:45 AM

When the software meets the hardware
 
On 27/01/2019 05:46, Anna Noyd-Dryver wrote:
martin.coffee wrote:


The guard was just locking the only working wash room on a Cardiff
Pompey service last year just as I got there. He suggested I got off at
Cosham so I had him endorse my ticket and caught the following gWr
service with a one hour delay. I claimed my refund for an hour's delay
and got it.


If the toilet was working, why was it being locked out of use?


Because it was no longer working!


[email protected] January 27th 19 01:29 PM

When the software meets the hardware
 
On Sat, 26 Jan 2019 22:20:37 -0000 (UTC)
Anna Noyd-Dryver wrote:
wrote:
On Sat, 26 Jan 2019 09:52:16 -0000 (UTC)
Anna Noyd-Dryver wrote:
wrote:
On Thu, 24 Jan 2019 20:22:39 -0000 (UTC)
Anna Noyd-Dryver wrote:
The vacuum flush saves water and retention tank capacity and allows the
train to run a whole day (or maybe two, for those which outstable) without


tanking;

How delightful. A mobile sewage farm.


The alternative is for the entire railway to be the sewage farm.


I meant in the sense of them no necessarily being emptied every night.


How else would you deal with the sets which outstable at Hereford,
Worcester and Exeter?


A portable vacuum unit to empty them. How else?

I can't remember the last time the toilets in my office failed never mind
my house. As for the locks failing, who the hell cares? Keep it shut with

your
foot.


How does that work with a sliding door, a wheelchair user, or even a
non-wheelchair user in the accessible toilets where the door is too far
away? Or the occasional station toilet cubicle where the door opens
outwards...


So make the open inward. Why does it have to slide? How do disabled people
cope in non train toilets?

The toilets in your house presumably aren’t used as intensively as train
ones? Over the years I’ve known domestic toilets get blocked, flush broken,
flushes which only work with a certain technique, multiple flushes needed
to actually clear the bowl... Mess room toilets which perhaps approach
train toilet frequency of use, get blocked often enough that people add the
word 'again' when they talk about it...


I can barely recall the last time I saw anyone use a toilet on a commuter
train.

Possibly, but those sort of journeys are probably 1 in 1000. There's little
reason to have toilets on most multiple units IMO, certainly not something
like Thameslink where the average journey is probably 45 mins.



Round here the commuter trains are often in the middle of long journeys,
between 4 and 10 hours end-to-end. Just because I’m only on board for 15
minutes doesn’t mean everyone else is.


10 hours? Where the hell is it going from and to?



All times are GMT. The time now is 01:42 AM.

Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2006 LondonBanter.co.uk